this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024

199 points (97.6% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26270 readers

1370 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

199

Are there previous historical examples of cult-like followings of US political candidates? (lemmy.sdf.org)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

64 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(This post was intended for [email protected], but as it seems they don't allow text posts, I'm posting it here)

This post will likely not go over well with everyone and some people may not agree with the premise of the question. Mods please remove if not allowed.

I am curious if the MAGA-esque approach to politics is new for the US, or if there have been other examples of similar political movements which may be considered "cult-like". To better define what I mean, here are some examples:

Large amounts of signs bearing a candidate's name being shown by single individuals (e.g. big trucks covered in Trump signs everywhere)
Use of a candidate name over the US flag
Use of a kind of supporter uniform (e.g. the red MAGA hat)
The "alternative facts" of MAGA, where debate can be impossible because supporters believe anyone who is a detractor must be lying
In some cases, voter intimidation or coercion from staunch supporters

It seems to me that some of this is new but I'd love to hear other thoughts. I have heard and seen many relatively obvious parallels to German politics in the 20s-40s, but I'm specifically wondering if anything similar has ever been seen in the US before.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I think John F. Kennedy qualified; he's been practically deified since his assassination, and his supporters were MAGA-level enthusiasts. Just the sheer level of conspiracy theory around his assassination, missing from all other assassinations - successful or attempted - is a good indicator. Even the attempted Trump assassination, which generated considerable tin-hat response, is now almost completely forgotten; certainly, nobody's talking about it in mainstream forums.

In my opinion, Kennedy was an incredible president and great statesman, but yeah, I think you could reasonably claim there was a cult of personality around him.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This is a huge reach and false equivalency. There is a difference between being a pop culture focus of a moment where you're mom was compelled to volunteer at his local election office and wear a button versus the maga bullshit that OP describes.

No. It's never been to this level, or close for that matter. Not because a candidate didn't want it, but because society maintained a basic level of decency and civil education that made today's depths impossible at scale really. Of course a huge focus of the last 50 years for Republicans has been denying access to and attacking public education to help form the undereducated and easily frightened mass that they now use to support trump. And then social media feeds and predatory news algorithms were probably the nail in the coffin to break that once held floor of civility.

Not on the same scale as trump, but there was an American Nazi party and there's the kkk. Those are probably your closest analogies in this country.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

In Living Color; 1988.

Search for "Kennedy." Long before Trump was a "thing" in the American zeitgeist.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Even the attempted Trump assassination, which generated considerable tin-hat response, is now almost completely forgotten; certainly, nobody’s talking about it in mainstream forums.

Well yeah, that's how attempted assassinations work. People don't remember the ones that don't work, they remember the ones that do. If it did succeed then it would be all anyone would talk about. The outcome is what matters in these situations, and greatly changes when and how people talk about it. That's just how these things go.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

The assassination attempt on Reagan also failed, and was bigger news, for far longer. Not JF Kennedy level, but it was more enduring than the attempt on Trump.

The news cycle on the Trump attempt was astonishingly brief.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

Where is the damage on his ear?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Right. I'll bet a lot of people here don't remember, or never knew that someone tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago

You might enjoy this 1964 essay "the paranoid style in American politics" : https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/

American politics has often been an arena for angry minds. In recent years we have seen angry minds at work mainly among extreme right-wingers, who have now demonstrated in the Goldwater movement how much political leverage can be got out of the animosities and passions of a small minority. But behind this I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wing. I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Back in the day I nearly kissed the ground Ron Paul walked on. There was also about as much conspiracy theory swirling among his followers as there is with MAGA.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago

I knew someone who was a Ron Paul supporter. Definitely heavily into the conspiratorial stuff. I think at the time, the movement was relatively small, so I hadn't considered that it was somewhat culty.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Every election within my life has been a battle between "Literal Reincarnation of Jesus" supporters and "If you don't vote for The Party, we will put your photo in the Two Minutes of Hate for being a fascist" supporters.

That should tell you what you need to know.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (2 children)

How old are you, if you don't mind me asking? Because elections were not like this when I was younger. I'm middle-aged.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I guess that depends on your age. Even for some of the most contested elections in my lifetime (e.g. Bush v Gore 2000), supporters of either side did not have the kind of rabid quality that so many have now.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago

Having lived in the Deep South at that time, I can assure you that there were definitely Bush stans who treated him like Maga treats Trump. The main difference was that they hadn't found a global network of support that could be broadcast to the public 24/7

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

I remember logging into BBS systems in the 90's and seeing a lot of hate for the Clintons. This was in St. Louis, a fairly blue city, but surrounded by red (the rest of MO as well as southern IL)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer

is a great read albeit dated about the topic.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

Jackson and Lincoln

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Possibly Ron Paul.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I mean, Mount Rushmore is a thing.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I take that more as a general nationalistic symbol. Yes, nationalism is also pretty cultish in a way, but it is less reliant on a single individual.

(And the faces of Mt. Rushmore are very much a blight on what the Lakota call Six Grandfathers).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What about Roosevelt then? He got voted into serving four terms before he established a term limit. This was two hundred years after anyone thought to add term limits, because the issue of voting people in for more than two terms had never happened before.

Or John F Kennedy, whose face defined a decade the same way Princess Diana defines a decade in the UK? Or Ronald Reagan, who almost any American can quote? Or Barack Obama whose likeness was plastered on the walls of schools everywhere in the nation even despite orders not to impose on faith or political groups.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

What about Roosevelt then? He got voted into serving four terms before he established a term limit.

But how were his voters? Did you see the kinds of things I listed in the post? I'm not saying it isn't the case, but I wouldn't think that FDR being reelected multiple times necessarily means his supporters were doing culty things as I listed.

Same with JFK, etc. (modulo Reagan who is mentioned in another comment). I'd say all of them have definitely been elevated to a weird status after the fact, but I'm not sure that puts them in this group.

load more comments